Will size continue to be a problem for MBB?

Submitted by julesh on

I was listening to the radio on my way into work this morning, and they were talking about how LeVert going down is good for the future of this team. Next year's team should have a lot of experience. I agree with that, and I'm excited for next year (while still being somewhat hopeful for this year.)

But then I thought about the Iowa game. Iowa was able to do whatever they wanted because they are just so much bigger than our players. No matter how much experience you have, it won't add inches to your height. How will the team overcome that?

(This topic probably doesn't really deserve its own thread, but it's a slow morning, so figured I'd get some discussion going.)

Space Coyote

February 9th, 2015 at 11:23 AM ^

To indicate that size wasn't a problem in those years. But it still was. Michigan was able to offset it enough to succeed, but it was certainly still an issue. GRIII got destroyed last year against Texas, but Michigan came out on top. Michigan needed McGary to basically have the game of his life and the light to miraculously turn on, along with hot shooting, to defeat Syracuse's 2-3 Zone on the way to the National Title game. MSU caused issues for Michigan between Payne and the essentially one-handed really big guy (Nix) on the floor at the same time.

Teams have battered and bruised Michigan down low repeatedly, the key has always been that the 4 causes a match-up problem on the other side of the floor. But I'd say size is still a concern at the 4, because it's something that needs to be offset to come out even. GRIII needed good games to offset being destroyed in the post and on the glass. But it was an area that could be exploited, and if GRIII had an off night, Michigan was going to be in trouble in those games.

So it was a concern and a problem in the past as well, it was just one that Michigan was able to overcome because they took advantage of it on the other end.

Space Coyote

February 9th, 2015 at 12:27 PM ^

Ridley had 4 OR and 5 DR to go along with 6 points.

Holmes had 5 OR and 4 DR to go along with 9 points.

As a team, UT had 21 OR and 20 DR, to Michigan's 11 OR and 19 DR. Texas had 11 more rebounds than Michigan. And Michigan went 14-28 from three and GRIII had a good mid-range game that day IIRC. Many of those were rebounds for others on UT's roster was because GRIII was getting handled on the boards.

It doesn't always show up in stats, but I think people that remember that game remember GRIII really struggling with UT's size inside but being able to take UT's bigs off the dribble on offense.

RobSk

February 9th, 2015 at 1:32 PM ^

was not that bigger teams didn't have an advantage on Michigan, but to claim (and I think with solid evidence) that Michigan's advantages in shooting skill, quickness, and athleticism more than offset the size disadvantage in most cases, getting us many wins against high quality opposition with excellent size.

       Rob

J.Madrox

February 9th, 2015 at 11:17 AM ^

Beilein recruits skill over just height, he will recruited talented big men, McGary, Doyle, Teske, Wilson, even Chatman is pretty tall. But he normally seems to priortize other basketball talents over pure size.

We have seen what Beileins ideal offense looks like last year and the year prior, and those teams had only 1 big man on the floor. It will always cause problems when Michigan runs into really tall teams like Iowa, Wisconsin or Kentucky last year, but you just need the offense to overcome the defensive size weakness.

It looks like more of a problem because Michigan just doesn't have enough talent on the floor to overcome Iowa's massive size advantage, but as others have said, the last two years teams didn't seem to struggle vs. teams with size, because they had the talent.

alum96

February 9th, 2015 at 11:38 AM ^

Again it is not just height.  Dawson is a horrific offensive player but is 6'6 and plays like he is 6'9.  You can't just look at a roster of names and look at their height.  Do you think Donnal or Dawson would win a rebound head to head 90% of the time?  Dawson or Doyle?

We recruit good enough size for everyone other than Kentucky.  But our 6'8 guys with 7'1 wingspan play like they are 6'8.  Other teams 6'8 guys jump out of the gym.  We lack athleticsm in our bigs and at the 4.

S.C. is correct - Beilein trades offensive efficiency out of the 4 for athleticsm.  In a perfect world you get both - but those players are rare.  And when your high 4 star (near 5 star) 4 comes in and has totally bombed you are screwed.

Not to put it all on Kam but if Kam is playing 25 minutes a night and providing 9 pts and 4 rbs per game - we win vs MSU, Indiana, and Wisconsin.  He was our big recruit  - and he didnt do anything like Blackmon, Melo or Russell are doing; all guys in the same tier as him out of HS.

GoBlueGB

February 9th, 2015 at 11:19 AM ^

Anyone watch Horford at the end of the Kentucky game on Saturday night?  Single handly blew the game for them, but refusing to rebound and refusing to go up strong when given the ball down long.  I hear people saw how we would be stronger with him, but I dont see it.  Horford has made little changes since leaving Michigan.

Padog

February 9th, 2015 at 11:19 AM ^

I think that size can always provide an issue. But Indiana is winning right now without anything even resembling a center. Also, when you have strengths in certain areas of the game, it hides weaknesses. For example, good 3 point shooting hides bad offensive rebounding/ no post game. Or, really good perimeter defenders hide not having an interior presence. Or vice versa. Next year this is what our team will look like:

PG: Derrick Walton Jr. Although he has had a disappointing season, he has been hurt practically all year. If he continues to improve, he will easily be a top 3 PG in the B1G next year.
Spike Albrecht, there has to be something wrong with spike right now. You can see him limping towards the end of games. After this year, when he gets healthy we will have two top 10 B1G PGs.
SG: Caris LeVert, if he comes back, watch out. He will be angry and possibly a candidate for player of the year.
Muhammed Ali Abdur-Rahkman, he has shown some flashes this year. A summer in the weight room and working on his three pointer and he will surprise many.
SF: Zak Irvin, I think we have realized that Zak is not a number one or number two guy. He strives in the role of spot up shooter. If he can get back to being a 40% three point shooter and maintain the ability to drive... We will go a long way.
Aubrey Dawkins, I can't wait to see what Sanderson does with this guy.
Duncan Robinson, Please be Nik.
PF: Mark Donnal, I really hope Mark works on his jump shot and beliein moves him to the 4.
Kam Chatman, just wait, I see Kam being really solid next year.
C: Ricky Doyle, Ricky needs conditioning bad,
Max Biefeldt, unguardableish




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

allintime23

February 9th, 2015 at 11:22 AM ^

Iowa did whatever they wanted because the offensive plan against a 2-3 zone failed from the get go and was never changed. The team is small but so was the national title game team. JB will continue to get good shooters over size. I think next year things will go much better just with experience and of course having the injured players back.

BJNavarre

February 9th, 2015 at 11:27 AM ^

Chatman has the size and frame to grow into a truly bruising 4, however, I question whether he has the motor to really take advantage of his size.

We'll actually be a very big team if Wilson or Chatman can become dependable starters.

harryddunn

February 9th, 2015 at 11:27 AM ^

"But then I thought about the Iowa game. Iowa was able to do whatever they wanted because they are just so much bigger than our players. No matter how much experience you have, it won't add inches to your height. How will the team overcome that?"

we got trucked by Iowa last year too, in the midst of our 15-3 Big Ten campaign

http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=400510019

most teams with size probably wonder if shooting will continue to be a problem

alum96

February 9th, 2015 at 11:42 AM ^

Iowa just ran over Maryland yesterday so I would not take too much from Iowa.  Not only are they a major matchup program for our roster they seem to be peaking here.   We just dont match up with certain teams at all.  If you can shoot 47% from the field and 37% from 3 pt land you chuckle it off as we did the past 3 years.  When you can't shoot like that everything gets exposed. 

taistreetsmyhero

February 9th, 2015 at 11:27 AM ^

It seems unlikely that rebounding will ever be a strength of a beilein team, but this year we've suffered from a sporadically anemic offense and poor individual defense. Comes with the territory of losing two of your best players and being really young. We've had success under beilein without being a good rebounding team, but size will always be something we have to overcome in a different aspect of the game.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Perkis-Size Me

February 9th, 2015 at 11:34 AM ^

This year goes to show just how valuable guys like J-Mo were to this team. I understand that the strength of a Beilein-coached team lies in precision shooting and being able to stretch the floor, but man oh man, do you still need a guy on the floor with some size who can go up and grab rebounds and give you second chance points.

Next year's team will be better because of all the experience guys are getting, but it might not matter much if teams like Iowa can simply out-muscle you and do whatever they want to you. Still, I'm giving Beilein a mulligan for this year. All three of our big men, all of whom were valuable components, either declared, graduated or transferred last year. It was unexpected, and it didn't give Beilein a ton of options.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Shop Smart Sho…

February 9th, 2015 at 11:49 AM ^

Your last sentence is spot on.

In Beilein's perfect world, Doyle and Wilson are redshirting while McGary runs 50/50 at the 5/4, being backed up in the 5 by "old-man" Horford, Donnal, and Bielfeldt.



In a bad world, Horford, Donnal, and Bielfeldt hold down the fort, setting good screens to free up Stauskas, LeVert, and Irvin.

In this nightmare scenario, Bielfeldt is the most consistant (not good, but consistant) 5, Doyle is effective at times, and Donnal is so bad he can't stay on the court for 2 minutes at a time.  Meanwhile, LeVert and Walton are out with injury, Irvin isn't ready to be the #1, and your big recruit needs some seasoning.

 

Still, the team is entertaining as hell to watch.  They somehow make 2 sub-6' tall PGs on the court at the same time work.  And Aubrey Dawkins flies sometimes.

Wolverine In Exile

February 9th, 2015 at 11:42 AM ^

but if Chatman was playing even close to his projected role, we'd be at least 2 games better, probably 3-4. I'm not going ot give up on him, but his disappointing play so far has to be analyzed fairly as a major cause of the team's issues.

Hugh Jass

February 9th, 2015 at 11:56 AM ^

DJ Wilson (I believe that is his name) out with an injury.  He is supposedly more a defender than scorer.  Long arms and a shot blocker.  They also have the kid from Ohio (Teske) who is nearing 7 feet in height -so the issue is being addressed.

club2230

February 9th, 2015 at 11:56 AM ^

Beilein has never had the personel and that is changing.

When he started at UofM the program was nowhere near what it is now therefore his ability,  to attract recruits was limited.  He pulled in Cronin (injury), Morgan (solid), Hortford (backup), McLimans (bench), and McGary (star).  That isn't much. 

He is in much different territory now.  Doyle and Donnel will be 4 year players and both have shown potential to be good.  Beilein has never had that at Michigan outside of Morgan and McGary, but that was only for a year and really not even that.  Sprinkle in Teske and whomever else we get and Beilein will, for the first time at Michigan, have a good stable of bigs.

Beilein missed on developing role players like McLimans, Christian, Lucas-Perry, and followed that up by developing stars very quickly.  That lead to an uneven roster with regards to experience.  I see this team core as one that will finally last a few years.  What that will bring as far as wins is a bit unknown to us now. 

Webber's Pimp

February 9th, 2015 at 12:09 PM ^

The short answer is yes. You cannot expect to win conference championships (or national championships) without adequate size. Exceptional guard and wing play can make up for these shortcomings and we've seen it during the Burke/THJR run to the Final 4. Size has been a recurring issue for the program in general terms and I think Beilein realizes this. Teske will also be on the squad next year and he will helop to add an additional level of depth. I see good things for us down the road but I for one do not want to see Dawkins playing the 4! 

bronxblue

February 9th, 2015 at 12:16 PM ^

They have a small team this year, but if a couple of the young guys continue to develop and play more they should have functional enough size to compete. Michigan won't ever be Kentucky in that department, but it seems like Beilein is trying to recruit more size.

cbs650

February 9th, 2015 at 1:34 PM ^

Its not size that is really the issue it where you play people. Beilen has recrutied basically to play a 4 guard line up and then you end up with Irvin or someone like him plaing the 4 at times. Offensively that works but defensively is where it poses a problem. If you look at who he recruited at WVU, its similar but he has yet to find his Kevin Pitsnogle while at Michigan

AC1997

February 9th, 2015 at 1:38 PM ^

I think your point is valid from the standpoint that everyone would like to have a tall and preferably athletic center in the middle for rebounding, shot-blocking, and offensive purposes.  Max would be awesome if he were 6'10".  Ricky plays like he's 7'0" tall so he will struggle against guys who actually are.  The simple answer is that we're are hoping that having 6'6" wing players and 6'8" power forwards will help overall along with Wilson's athleticism at 6'9" in the middle, added fitness from Doyle, and the eventual arrival of Teske.  

 
But in reality, it is the exception, not the rule, to have a large front-line.  While Purdue and Iowa boast good big-men, that's unusual - especially when you factor in what Beilein is looking for in a player.  
 
I've been following Michigan basketball since right around the Fab Five era and the number of guys who are "tall" has been few and far between - which hasn't hurt our ability to be successful.  Here's a quick recap of guys you'd consider to be "true centers" beyond what we have on the current roster:
  • Mitch McGary (12-13) - 6'10"
  • Blake McLimans (10-13) - 6'11"
  • Ben Cronin (09-10) - 7'0"
  • Zach Gibson (07-10) - 6'10"
  • Ekpe Udoh (07-08) - 6'10"
  • Courtney Sims (04-07) - 6'11"
  • Chris Hunter (03-06) - 6'11"
  • Graham Brown (03-06) - 6'9"
  • Amadou Ba (03-06) - 6'10"
  • Josh Moore (01-02) - 7'2"
  • Chris Young (99-02) - 6'9"
  • Josh Asselin (98-01) - 6'11"
  • Pete Vignier (97-00) - 6'11"
That's as far back as MGoBlue's rosters go.  Prior to that you had the following:
  • NIT Champ era:  Robert Traylor (6'8"), Maurice Taylor (6'9"), Maceo Baston (6'9").
  • Fab Five era:  Chris Webber (6'9"), Juwan Howard (6'9"), Eric Riley (7'1")
  • NCAA Champ Era:  Loy Vaught (6'9"), Terry Mills (6'10")
That range covers the last 25 years of Michigan basketball.  How many of those guys fit the description from the original post?  Udoh is close but still undersized and he didn't hit his stride until at Baylor.  Sims would qualify except that he epitomizes the underachieving nature of Amaker's teams.  Then you're all the way back at maybe undersized Baston or Vaught.  Pretty slim pickings.....and we've made four championship games in that time.  

DualThreat

February 9th, 2015 at 2:41 PM ^

Didn't want to create a new thread just for this, but I'm waiting for a flight at Huntsville International Airport, face buried in my I-phone, wearing my UM tee shirt and a man walking by says "Go Blue". I look up say "Go Blue" back, the man gives me a fist bump, and walkson his way. The whole thing happened in 5 seconds and it wasn't until 5 seconds after that that my mind caught up to me and I realized - holy crap, that was John Beilen! Either that or a really convincing doppelgänger. I wonder what he would be doing today in Alabama?